David Kilcullen – What are we fighting for? Islamism and the threat to liberal ideas

This entry was posted in International, National Security. Bookmark the permalink.

22 Responses to David Kilcullen – What are we fighting for? Islamism and the threat to liberal ideas

  1. Notafan

    So, what is the referendum question?
    Personally I have zero tolerance for an attack on Australian soil.
    Damned if I think Australians should live in fear so muslims can what? Think they don’t need to engage in terrorism?
    It’s funny how we can welcome Hindu, Sihk, Buddhist and every other religious and secular migrant without fear of either attacks on democracy or demands for religious accomodations but not muslims.
    They don’t have to be violent to think we are all guilty.

  2. A Lurker

    I listened to the speech – it sounded like appeasement to me.

    Nothing we do will turn the young men who are now choosing to be radicalised into good citizens of Australia, the reason why we can’t do anything, is because the ‘old men’ of their religion and culture speak louder and with more passion than the ‘old men’ of our culture and our society.

  3. Notafan

    Monash islam expert Greg Barton says the hardcore don’t deradicalise and go on to poison others.
    We can’t deport Australian citizens so what do we do?
    If we had ecoterrorists would we tiptoe through the tulips with environmentalist groups?

    September article from the Age

  4. Notafan

    Monash islam expert Greg Barton says the hardcore don’t deradicalise and go on to poison others.
    We can’t deport Australian citizens so what do we do?
    If we had ecoterrorists would we tiptoe through the tulips with environmentalist groups?


    September article from the Age

  5. ChrisPer

    What we need is to learn from THEM.

    Make our society resilient – more than the terrorists . Terrorism only works when people wail and wring their hands and push their voting buttons to ‘like’ free stuff and perfect safety.

    Sack our media. Replace them with an education system for making heroes of the ordinary people – not an army of Davids, but a whole population of Davids. Let the pork-shunning slavers and reavers detonate their pathetic bombs and then just keep stamping them into the dirt like the cockroaches they are, whereever they can be caught.

    Dont waste energy on internal political enemies; make heroes of the responders and recoverers and volunteers and CCW shooters that deal with the vermin, and make the ‘how do you feel’ and ‘eeevil bush’ journalists unemployable lepers, like they would have in the Blitz of WWII.

    Lift weights. Learn first aid, mental strength, Farsi and Arabic. Improve marksmanship. Teach our kids how to call in artillery on killers, and rejoice in the life and civilisation we build until their parasitic civilisation demonstrates they actually want life and peace.

  6. ChrisPer

    In Graz, Austria is an armoury that houses the weapons the people of that town stored and drew to fight the Ottoman invaders in the decades when Europe was in danger of falling to invading barbarism. It is very very instructive, speaking of the fear, the response in defense spending, preparation and bravery of the ordinary citizens against the horrors of the constantly probing and attacking invaders.

    As I inspected the halberds, half-armours and muskets I met and fell to talking with a lady who seemed to have a wide understanding of the history and strategic picture. I asked what she did, and where she worked. She thought a moment and to explain said ‘Have you heard of David Kilcullen?’

  7. Clam Chowdah

    A bit simplistic.

    It’s also hard to imagine that there could BE any more freedom in Australia so as to assist young douche bags to see that violent jihad is not the answer. Dr.Kilcullen doesn’t identify what these magic freedoms, beyond current freedoms, consist of.

  8. Clam Chowdah

    As I inspected the halberds, half-armours and muskets I met and fell to talking with a lady who seemed to have a wide understanding of the history and strategic picture. I asked what she did, and where she worked. She thought a moment and to explain said ‘Have you heard of David Kilcullen?’

    Then what happened?

  9. ChrisPer

    Then what happened?

    She said their group lecture/research at the facility just next door to the Navy Yard where a shooter had gone amok just a few days before. We talked mostly about the armoury and how what it was and what it meant should be much better known around the world.

  10. Clam Chowdah

    Cool, thanks.

    I strongly agree with his comments from the point at which he observes fighting ISIS is a conventional battle rather than an ideology, through to his closing observations.

  11. Bons

    He has set himself up as a demagogue. The most dangerous beast on the planet. Totally unqualified but loved by the ABC.

  12. Nothing we do will turn the young men who are now choosing to be radicalised into good citizens of Australia

    The only way to stop psychopaths is to not give them anything to enact out their fantasies, or by force.

    They are, or should be, worthy Darwin Award recipients.

  13. cohenite

    All terrorists are muslims; it doesn’t matter that not all muslims are terrorists; no one knows which muslims will become terrorists.

    Security measures do not have to affect non-muslim citizens; existing freedoms for non-muslims do nto have to be sacrificed; security measures only to have to apply to muslims. Islam must be dealt with as though it is a political ideology akin to communism: inimical to Western democracy; if you are a muslim you must be assumed to be ideologically opposed to Western democracy and treated as such an enemy should be treated.

  14. John Comnenus

    Kilcullen is a shyster. Remember not so long ago his big idea was the accidental terrorist who got into terrorism accidentally in response to our miscalculations. He didn’t hate us – it was all an accident. Now he is arguing it is Salafist Islam. But Salafism, which has been around for over a millennium, will magically disappear because we give its adherents the freedom to conduct Dawah, recruit and coordinate terrorist attacks in Australia.

    When he was in Iraq, Kilcullen was all about clear, hold and build. That didn’t work, nor will his latest brain fart. He calls IS a classic tank on tank war because it is a conventional state. All terrorists and insurgents aim to become the governing power in a State they create or take over. The fact that IS is a State is a testament to the failure of the previous counter terrorism and counter insurgency strategies. Strategies very heavily influenced by the writings of Kilcullen.

    Kilcullen is looking for a simple answer that doesn’t involve blaming the broader Islamic ideology of Jihad. He won’t succeed by denying the truth. The animating ideology is Islam and Jihad. That ideology must be fought, on the religious, political and military level.

  15. Anne

    I considered going to this lecture. I’m glad I didn’t. Kilcullen sounds like an appeaser.

    Cohenite

    All terrorists are muslims; it doesn’t matter that not all muslims are terrorists; no one knows which muslims will become terrorists.

    They are all terrorists. They may not all be practising their blade skills or learning about IED’s but, (assuming they understand Islam), they are all on the same page readying their already parallel society to take over – teaching in the mosques and infiltrating the educational, political, bureaucratic and media institutions.

    It is every Muslim’s religious obligation to fight the Jihad in the name of Allah, either by revolutionary or evolutionary means. Only clueless politicians, academics and hippies don’t get this.

    The goal of Islam is to destroy civilisation (Dar al-Harb) to make way for the Ummah (Dar al-Islam.

  16. JohnA

    Hmm, he identified the Islamist world-view as holding that no-one in a democracy is innocent – all are therefore legitimate targets of their terrorism/struggle.

    So why do “moderate Muslims” and their cheer squads in the West whine and complain of unfairness when the same principle is applied to them? Particularly when terrorist actions are not roundly condemned by those moderate Muslims and their cheer squads?

  17. Notafan

    Same old, we don’t know which individual muslim will ‘suddenly ‘ becone radicalised meanwhile we expend billions on anti terrorism while being expected to continue to succour muslims in our society.
    The same muslims who only offer the most qualified condemnation of their radical sons brothers husbands uncles and even claim that they are victims ie the four fatties,
    At the same time the victimhood continues. A splash of paint here, a hard look there.
    Then the demands for special privileges, the right to ignore our social conventions.
    The parasitical extraction of funds as our food industry is overseen by their halal certification industry.
    We’d like a referendum on maintaining our freedom but I know the question I’d like to see asked probably isn’t the one being suggested.
    Seriously we should develop some tolerance for acts of terrorism as a fair price to pay for a reduction of government intrusion?

  18. LABCR-TV

    If only he could spell ‘Islamism’.
    And why didn’t he mention that the cia, israel and the saudi’s have trained and financed crISIS in order to destabilise the region?

  19. struth

    This young bloke with a bit of security experience having a thought bubble sort of makes you want to say…….keep going, in a few more years you may get it right. I give him only a C plus. But with an encouragement smiley.

  20. blogstrop

    I think he’s saying they need cullin’ & killin’, in any order. The aspirational stuff is b/s.

  21. Leo G

    David Kilcullen’s opening argument is demonstrably false.
    If ISIS holds every citizen of a democratic country responsible for the policies of that government and its allies, how could it accept recruits from such a country?
    In fact, many of the leaders of ISIS have been at some time citizens of democratic countries which have actively opposed to the actions and objectives of ISIS.
    ISIS would regard all Sunni Muslims in countries like Australia as potential or actual allies and would not arbitrarily regard them as liable for the actions of the Australian government.

  22. Peter

    David Kilcullen’s opening argument is demonstrably false.
    If ISIS holds every citizen of a democratic country responsible for the policies of that government and its allies, how could it accept recruits from such a country?

    You DO know the difference between an absolute and a generalization, don’t you?

Comments are closed.